Colorado Springs: A Teabagger Paradise

[Ban my account ffs!]

Liberals just don't get it.  Raising taxes isn't the answer to everything.  In an economic downturn, families tighten their belts to live within their means.  The local government should too.  That they seem to think they should be able to raise taxes and live high off the hog when their citizens are hurting is just plain dumb - and a good way to get themselves voted out of office.

When faced with the situation where residents can't afford and don't want to pay more, local governments almost always threaten cut back on the visible things, seemingly out of spite, to make those ungrateful bastards who pay their salaries give them more money.  Instead of asking whether the mayor and the council really need multiple assistants, secretaries, and secretaries to those assistants, they threaten to cut parks, police and fire.  

There is a lot of bloat in government that has been cut in private sector businesses and can be cut there, too.  Especially in education, where there's this stupid emphasis on class size (read: more teachers for the teachers' union) instead of leveraging technological advances to make our kids smarter at a lower cost.  

Yes and to me it looks like a lot of this is meant to create more unionized gov't workers who are afterall not subject to the laws of economy like private sector unionized workers are.

A lot of money can be cut from education. The problem isn't lack of funding but lack of efficiency and effectiveness as well as waste.

Where is the waste?  Where is this gross lack of efficiency?

I want real, concrete evidence.  Numbers.  Not just platitudes that Rush Limbaugh told you.

What?  Teachers make too much money?  They're just whiny?  What is it?

How do you envision schools?  Where should the cuts come from?

My school district spends 75% of its general fund money in the classroom (teachers, textbooks, supplies, desks).. the other 25% pays for administration, janitors, and extracurricular stuff as well as heavily subsidizing the transportation budget since that is determined by number of students rather than number of miles driven.

Our school district reduced the number of teachers by 25% in 3 years due to budget cuts and class sizes grew from 20 to just under 30.  Test scores also went down.

The community came together and passed a property tax hike to restore funding for new school buses (the district hadn't purchased any new ones in 5 years), all day, everyday kindergarten, and smaller class sizes.  Class sizes are now back down in the low 20s range and test scores are improving.

The crime is that we have had to pay it through much higher property taxes... because the state has ignored its constitutional duty to provide a system of uniform public schools.

So, since you seem to know so much about the efficiency in our schools.. where, EXACTLY, should the cuts be made?

[Alcon]

Not to interrupt the narrative, but there's very little chance in hell that a majority of Colorado Springs residents would identify with the explicit goals of the Tea Party.

Colorado Springs isn't a city.  It's a collection of single occupancy units that all just so happened to form in the same place.

P.S. And before anyone dives on me... yes, I have actually been there.

Does that have much bearing on municipal policy that could explain this?

I'm just saying, calling Colorado Springs a "conservative city" is largely a misnomer.

Ah, got you, sorry for overanalyzing

[Хahar 🤔]

The arrogance...

Anyway, I could easily say the same kind of attack towards the left about California's predicament. Besides, most of you saw what you wanted to see here, and spun it as such.

Um... no... California's predicament can be blamed on the same anti-tax attitude.

Really? The state with one of the highest taxes?

Those taxes exist because of the criminally insane restrictions on the tax code passed by voters.

[12th Doctor]

Not to interrupt the narrative, but there's very little chance in hell that a majority of Colorado Springs residents would identify with the explicit goals of the Tea Party.

Colorado Springs isn't a city.  It's a collection of single occupancy units that all just so happened to form in the same place.

P.S. And before anyone dives on me... yes, I have actually been there.

Does that have much bearing on municipal policy that could explain this?

I'm just saying, calling Colorado Springs a "conservative city" is largely a misnomer.

Ah, got you, sorry for overanalyzing

Yeah, wasn't intended to be profound.

[Vepres]

The arrogance...

Anyway, I could easily say the same kind of attack towards the left about California's predicament. Besides, most of you saw what you wanted to see here, and spun it as such.

Um... no... California's predicament can be blamed on the same anti-tax attitude.

Really? The state with one of the highest taxes?

Those taxes exist because of the criminally insane restrictions on the tax code passed by voters.

I don't follow.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Property Taxes in California are a treat!  Everything else?  Not so much.  That's what Xahar means.

[Torie]

Another paper, yet another, came out today, by two Harvard economists, that just spending more in an economic downturn, in a cross country analysis, does not work nearly as well as tax cuts. I will try to find it in due course. I don't claim to be an expert on macro economics (micro economics is my thing), but I think some modesty about this all is in order. Maybe we don't know as much as we think we know. Is that at all possible?

[cinyc]

Where is the waste?  Where is this gross lack of efficiency?

I want real, concrete evidence.  Numbers.  Not just platitudes that Rush Limbaugh told you.

What?  Teachers make too much money?  They're just whiny?  What is it?

How do you envision schools?  Where should the cuts come from?

My school district spends 75% of its general fund money in the classroom (teachers, textbooks, supplies, desks).. the other 25% pays for administration, janitors, and extracurricular stuff as well as heavily subsidizing the transportation budget since that is determined by number of students rather than number of miles driven.

Our school district reduced the number of teachers by 25% in 3 years due to budget cuts and class sizes grew from 20 to just under 30.  Test scores also went down.

The community came together and passed a property tax hike to restore funding for new school buses (the district hadn't purchased any new ones in 5 years), all day, everyday kindergarten, and smaller class sizes.  Class sizes are now back down in the low 20s range and test scores are improving.

The crime is that we have had to pay it through much higher property taxes... because the state has ignored its constitutional duty to provide a system of uniform public schools.

So, since you seem to know so much about the efficiency in our schools.. where, EXACTLY, should the cuts be made?

Teaching methods today are largely the same as they have been for the past two centuries - a person at the front of the classroom lecturing students.  Innovation is stifled by teachers unions and the public school monopoly.  Giving parents vouchers to send their children to whatever school they want would break that monopoly and allow for innovation - allow for technology and long-distance learning to substitute for teachers, where appropriate - which, in my opinion, is more often than teachers unions would want.   Substituting capital for labor to run things more efficiently seems to happen in every industry but most governments.  Productivity increases in the real world, but rarely in the government world, where ever more and more union employees are hired and given benefits that few in the real world have, like guaranteed pensions and tenure.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Another paper, yet another, came out today, by two Harvard economists, that just spending more in an economic downturn, in a cross country analysis, does not work nearly as well as tax cuts. I will try to find it in due course. I don't claim to be an expert on macro economics (micro economics is my thing), but I think some modesty about this all is in order. Maybe we don't know as much as we think we know. Is that at all possible?

But how do you pay for those tax cuts?  By slashing welfare spending when its needed most?  Turning off streetlights, getting rid of cops and firefighters?

Or, perhaps (gasp), we should be paying higher taxes when times are good to build up reserves.  But that would be too much for Republicans, Torie!

Sometimes I wonder if the ultra conservatives would just assume have total anarchy.. where they just have the pastor dictate the morals and they, the church members, enforce them on society with their guns.

[Ban my account ffs!]

Where is the waste?  Where is this gross lack of efficiency?

I want real, concrete evidence.  Numbers.  Not just platitudes that Rush Limbaugh told you.

What?  Teachers make too much money?  They're just whiny?  What is it?

How do you envision schools?  Where should the cuts come from?

My school district spends 75% of its general fund money in the classroom (teachers, textbooks, supplies, desks).. the other 25% pays for administration, janitors, and extracurricular stuff as well as heavily subsidizing the transportation budget since that is determined by number of students rather than number of miles driven.

Our school district reduced the number of teachers by 25% in 3 years due to budget cuts and class sizes grew from 20 to just under 30.  Test scores also went down.

The community came together and passed a property tax hike to restore funding for new school buses (the district hadn't purchased any new ones in 5 years), all day, everyday kindergarten, and smaller class sizes.  Class sizes are now back down in the low 20s range and test scores are improving.

The crime is that we have had to pay it through much higher property taxes... because the state has ignored its constitutional duty to provide a system of uniform public schools.

So, since you seem to know so much about the efficiency in our schools.. where, EXACTLY, should the cuts be made?

Teaching methods today are largely the same as they have been for the past two centuries - a person at the front of the classroom lecturing students.  Innovation is stifled by teachers unions and the public school monopoly.  Giving parents vouchers to send their children to whatever school they want would break that monopoly and allow for innovation - allow for technology and long-distance learning to substitute for teachers, where appropriate - which, in my opinion, is more often than teachers unions would want.   Substituting capital for labor to run things more efficiently seems to happen in every industry but most governments.  Productivity increases in the real world, but rarely in the government world, where ever more and more union employees are hired and given benefits that few in the real world have, like guaranteed pensions and tenure.

Actually... government has just been less keen to give up things like guaranteed pensions and tenure BECAUSE of the unions. 

My grandpa worked for Northern States Power from 1955 until 1990.  Him and his entire family were afforded good health insurance, a comfortable pension upon retirement, as well as sick leave and ample vacation time.  This was all on top of his salary.

What changed between then and now?  What is fundamentally different now than back in the 50s, 60s, and 70s?  DO people work less hard so they deserve less?

I think the people that demand fair wages and full benefits are freedom fighters.  I don't understand why someone like you, Cinyc, are so in bed with the executive interests.. what gain do you get for it?  Nothing.  You pay more and get less.  You work harder and you earn less.

But I think it's more the issue of forced competition.  You're fighting for a slice of an ever shrinking pie.. so you start to scorn your fellow workers in order to try and secure your slice of the pie.

[Marokai Backbeat]

Another paper, yet another, came out today, by two Harvard economists, that just spending more in an economic downturn, in a cross country analysis, does not work nearly as well as tax cuts.

The CBO disagrees.

[Torie]

So many issues, so little time. The dirty little secret however, is that taxing  the "rich" more won't really get "mainstream"  liberals where they want to go very much. It just isn't that easy. And it is case specific, and yes, building up a rainy day fund when we are flush, is prudent. However, in the case of the Feds, that just means paying down the debt a bit. And neither party is much interested in telling folks who really don't deserve laws that benefit them, who are in their base, that cost us a ton, directly or indirectly, that they need to just chill out, and get on a diet. Is there any other way, in particular, to move funds to where they are most needed?

Neither party is honest about the hard choices we face. That was why I flipped positive, when Obama at least hinted at it, in his meeting with the GOP caucus. We need more of that kind of talk - in short - we need more candor. We need more politicians with the balls to treat us like adults, and not spoiled children, even if it means their political careers per the conventional wisdom, might be over. But I suspect, their careers won't be over, if they deal with the tough choices in a fair and balanced way, and are candid  about it. I know that when I try to be that way, I more often engender respect, from all sides, more often than not.

[Torie]

Another paper, yet another, came out today, by two Harvard economists, that just spending more in an economic downturn, in a cross country analysis, does not work nearly as well as tax cuts.

The CBO disagrees.

OK. They already commented on the Harvard paper?  Gosh they are efficient!

[Marokai Backbeat]

Another paper, yet another, came out today, by two Harvard economists, that just spending more in an economic downturn, in a cross country analysis, does not work nearly as well as tax cuts.

The CBO disagrees.

OK. They already commented on the Harvard paper?  Gosh they are efficient!

No need to be snarky, Torie, I'm just talking about the CBO report on economic stimulus back in 2008. It's not particularly kind about tax cuts for the most part. Mark Zandi, a former advisor to the McCain campaign, also testified to congress about his views on economic stimulus, and his report is at least worth a read, especially given it's conclusions.

[RI]

Another paper, yet another, came out today, by two Harvard economists, that just spending more in an economic downturn, in a cross country analysis, does not work nearly as well as tax cuts.

Strange. Everything I've ever heard is that spending works better and has a higher multiplier than taxes because reductions in taxation have a tendency to encourage more personal saving than consumption, whereas spending should do the opposite. I would tend to think, though I have not read the paper, that the discrepancy may have to do with the way the money is spent and how it is delved out. For example, money given directly to banks or corporations might not necessarily translate into increased consumption spending, especially if they hoard or misappropriate it, which has happened. If the spending is directed straight to the consumer (voucher-like distributions would be the best in this case, I would think), it has more chance of being spent and multiplying.

Then again, I have not read the paper yet.

[opebo]

It is rather obvious that 'tax cuts' (privilege increases) cannot have any beneficial effect on economic growth during a downturn - the psychology of a downturn is that people are scared to consume.  Cutting taxes in the already privileged does nothing to increase demand (consumption).  Any such studies that tout this absurd premise can be dismissed as owner propaganda.

Regarding the original thread title - I would have preferred:

"Colorado Springs: A Teabaggin' Town'.

[Godspeed]

Small towns across America must be nothing but chaos.

How can they live with a lack of police helicopters, lack of police officers, lack of paid firefighters, lack of public workers, lack of updated public parks, and a lack of street lights?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Not to interrupt the narrative, but there's very little chance in hell that a majority of Colorado Springs residents would identify with the explicit goals of the Tea Party.

Colorado Springs isn't a city.  It's a collection of single occupancy units that all just so happened to form in the same place.

P.S. And before anyone dives on me... yes, I have actually been there.

Does that have much bearing on municipal policy that could explain this?

I'm just saying, calling Colorado Springs a "conservative city" is largely a misnomer.

Ah, got you, sorry for overanalyzing

Yeah, wasn't intended to be profound.

Though, oddly enough, it helps to explain things a great deal.

[JSojourner]

This thread is like one massive circle jerk.

Except everyone is already dry.

Wait for it.
OH YES!!!!
Okay, now everyone is dry.

OKay now...THIS post was win.  Mechaman...you better never leave.

[JSojourner]

Another paper, yet another, came out today, by two Harvard economists, that just spending more in an economic downturn, in a cross country analysis, does not work nearly as well as tax cuts. I will try to find it in due course. I don't claim to be an expert on macro economics (micro economics is my thing), but I think some modesty about this all is in order. Maybe we don't know as much as we think we know. Is that at all possible?

I'm sure that's true, Torie.  I think when you talk about tax cuts, what needs to be determined is, "whose taxes"?  Those who earn far more that you or I (you're doing really well and I am what you would call comfortable) tend not to use their tax cut savings for things that stimulate the economy.  Remember the little chart Moody's put out about a year ago?  (Let me see if I can find it.)


So if people want to talk tax cuts for the working poor, I am all over that.  Small businesses?  Yeah, I am usually in favor -- provided the company is retaining and creating good jobs. And as for the middle class, I think sometimes yes, sometimes no.  I just depends...but I can be persuaded.  The top five percent?  No thanks.  It's not class warfare (at least, not any more of a class war than conservatives have declared on the working poor)...it's just common sense.  Shoveling more cash into the Cayman Islands or a Swiss bank account is not helping our economy.

[Torie]

Ya, that is true, although the time horizon is important. Investment pays off in the long run, and the rich don't put their money under a mattress typically (although that SOS Powell in Illinois, put his cash bribe money in shoe boxes in a closet (about 800K), and that was well, deflationary actually. Are you old enough JS to remember that one? 

 As you know, I am not the type to bitch about my tax rate. And even when I was more conservative, I didn't bitch. In fact, I was morally uncomfortable using (although I did use), some tax loopholes that were available back when that I thought were wrong.

I am kind of an unpredictable chap aren't I? 

[Vepres]

Neither party is honest about the hard choices we face. That was why I flipped positive, when Obama at least hinted at it, in his meeting with the GOP caucus. We need more of that kind of talk - in short - we need more candor. We need more politicians with the balls to treat us like adults, and not spoiled children, even if it means their political careers per the conventional wisdom, might be over. But I suspect, their careers won't be over, if they deal with the tough choices in a fair and balanced way, and are candid  about it. I know that when I try to be that way, I more often engender respect, from all sides, more often than not.

It's funny, but you just said literally exactly what I was thinking yesterday while watching Hardball. Do psychic abilities come with age, Torie?

[JSojourner]

Ya, that is true, although the time horizon is important. Investment pays off in the long run, and the rich don't put their money under a mattress typically (although that SOS Powell in Illinois, put his cash bribe money in shoe boxes in a closet (about 800K), and that was well, deflationary actually. Are you old enough JS to remember that one? 

 As you know, I am not the type to bitch about my tax rate. And even when I was more conservative, I didn't bitch. In fact, I was morally uncomfortable using (although I did use), some tax loopholes that were available back when that I thought were wrong.

I am kind of an unpredictable chap aren't I? 

You're perfectly predictable, Torie.  You're a left wing socialist.  Except when you're being a right wing fascist.  See how easy that was? 

[k-onmmunist]

Another paper, yet another, came out today, by two Harvard economists, that just spending more in an economic downturn, in a cross country analysis, does not work nearly as well as tax cuts.

The CBO disagrees.

The CBO isn't God, and it isn't omnipresent. In fact, it's related to Congress, so it's probably even less trustworthy.

[Guderian]

Oh, I'm sure if it's that bad in Colorado Springs they can all move to some liberal utopia like Detroit.